Gearbox made their
promised announcement
of new Borderlands 2 DLC at PAX Australia, revealing plans for an
Ultimate Vault Hunter Upgrade Pack 2: Digistruct Peak coming "soonish" to
raise the game's level cap to 72, add a new training course, and provide an
object lesson in the dangers of calling something the "ultimate." There are
details
on IncGamers where they also have word on the announcement of another pack
called Headhunter Pack: T.K. Baha's Bloody Harvest, saying that will come
some time before Halloween, befitting T.K.'s newfound status as a zombie. The
second Ultimate Vault Hunter pack will be $5.00 while pricing on Bloody Harvest
is TBD, and while they specify the first DLC will not be part of season passes,
they do not address this for the second pack, though as far as we know the
season's pass has been fulfilled now.

The season passes are also still onsale. You don't need to preorder them.

I bought the season pass when there was enough DLC out that it was essentially 4 for the price of 3. And I think it's been on sale and been for for the price of 2.

In that regard it was a good deal for me. I honestly bought it the day Hammerlock came out. Although, once I started playing Hammerlock, it seemed like I didn't really save any money, but given that I was going to purhcase it anyway...

Jivaro wrote on Jul 21, 2013, 12:35:I solve the problems I have with "Season Passes" by not buying them. Nobody, not a single developer or publisher, has earned enough trust from me to give them money without knowing the details of what I will get in return or having control over what exactly it gets me. If a Season Pass was defined as something like "Four DLC packs, mix and match", that might change my mind. For example, they say they are going to make 8 DLC packs and you can use your Season Pass to pick 4, depending on the price point and game type that might be tempting. Another example would be if a Season Pass was not announced until after the 4 DLC were released and it was just a discounted price, that might change my mind. In fact, the few season passes I have purchased have essentially been exactly that. I have simply waited to do it until after the included content is released. Borderlands 2 is good example. The only DLC I had for that up until very recently was the Mechromancer. (favorite class) It wasn't until Tiny Tina's DLC and a deep price discount that I felt that the Season Pass was worth the cost based on peer reviews of the DLC.

The problem with buying a Season Pass without knowing the details of the DLC releases is that between outsourcing and multiplayer only content...there is just too much DLC I don't care about. This erases any value in the Season Pass concept as it is used today by most companies.

The practice of simply waiting hasn't cost me any additional money yet as the few season passes I have bought were a)after the DLC included was detailed and b)discounted heavily. I understand where Itburns is coming from, but honestly, if these companies can put this stuff out there and people are willing to buy it...more power to them. I know many of us here like to bitch about the various ways the AAA companies take advantage of the underinformed mainstream customer base, but that is just how business is, in any market segment. It just isn't something I can find a way to get incensed about. To me, if the mainstream/casual gamers don't care enough about their money to do something about this obvious cash grabbing...then why should I? I suppose it helps that I am not one of those people that has to have something the day it comes out. Whether I get it day 1 or day 101 really doesn't make a difference to me anymore. If I was more into multiplayer I suppose that would change things a bit.

We seriously need a vote system here, as this is the most reasonable, common sense post I've seen in awhile.

I solve the problems I have with "Season Passes" by not buying them. Nobody, not a single developer or publisher, has earned enough trust from me to give them money without knowing the details of what I will get in return or having control over what exactly it gets me. If a Season Pass was defined as something like "Four DLC packs, mix and match", that might change my mind. For example, they say they are going to make 8 DLC packs and you can use your Season Pass to pick 4, depending on the price point and game type that might be tempting. Another example would be if a Season Pass was not announced until after the 4 DLC were released and it was just a discounted price, that might change my mind. In fact, the few season passes I have purchased have essentially been exactly that. I have simply waited to do it until after the included content is released. Borderlands 2 is good example. The only DLC I had for that up until very recently was the Mechromancer. (favorite class) It wasn't until Tiny Tina's DLC and a deep price discount that I felt that the Season Pass was worth the cost based on peer reviews of the DLC.

The problem with buying a Season Pass without knowing the details of the DLC releases is that between outsourcing and multiplayer only content...there is just too much DLC I don't care about. This erases any value in the Season Pass concept as it is used today by most companies.

The practice of simply waiting hasn't cost me any additional money yet as the few season passes I have bought were a)after the DLC included was detailed and b)discounted heavily. I understand where Itburns is coming from, but honestly, if these companies can put this stuff out there and people are willing to buy it...more power to them. I know many of us here like to bitch about the various ways the AAA companies take advantage of the underinformed mainstream customer base, but that is just how business is, in any market segment. It just isn't something I can find a way to get incensed about. To me, if the mainstream/casual gamers don't care enough about their money to do something about this obvious cash grabbing...then why should I? I suppose it helps that I am not one of those people that has to have something the day it comes out. Whether I get it day 1 or day 101 really doesn't make a difference to me anymore. If I was more into multiplayer I suppose that would change things a bit.

I do get the whole "Season Pass" arguments. It's a bad moniker for what is really only a DLC Pack. There would be no arguments if it was termed "DLC Pack" instead of something that implies you get everything released within a certain time frame.

For me when I hear "Season Pass" on a game, I expect that whatever comes out before the last bit of promised DLC is released is included. That means in this case of BL2, this new pack being announced is NOT included since the last DLC promised Tiny Tina is already released. But the Krieg DLC should have been included since it was released well ahead of the Tiny Tina DLC being released.

Personally, I think the publishers need to change the terminology because most people hear season pass and they immediately think of DirecTV like plans. It really does feel like a big ripoff when they haven't released the last promised DLC and then release something that you have to pay extra for like Krieg.

Verno wrote on Jul 21, 2013, 02:41:Eh I don't know, I would sympathize more with him if his complaints were related to quality.

I don't know, I think he's got a valid argument. Yes, the fine print said "4 DLC" (or whatever, didn't pay that much attention to it), but the reality is that generally when you buy a season's pass, you get all the DLC that's released up to a certain point. In this case, you'd expect to get the first 4 DLC additions that came out. This is the first case I recall of extra DLC being released during a season that someone didn't get with their season pass (and their might have been other examples I've missed, granted). It seems rather sketchy to charge people for a DLC season, and then mention "Oh yeah, we're going to be releasing some other DLC during that period that you'll still have to pay to get".

They want to do that after the season? Ok, fine. During it seems to be pushing the boundaries on money-grubbing.

Redmask wrote on Jul 21, 2013, 02:30:I think its his responsibility to read the fine print but I can also understand his frustration a bit since other games have already created that expectation and multi-season pass games aren't exactly commonplace yet. As for the term itself given that it usually encompasses a period of time I think they could come up with something better, it was chosen because of familiarity more than anything else.

Eh I don't know, I would sympathize more with him if his complaints were related to quality. Some of the content packs were outsourced and I certainly didn't know that up front despite reading the advertisement text in detail, if I had I wouldn't have purchased a seasons pass.

I do kinda get his gripes because people want a complete ownership experience and that's why companies do the piecemeal DLC thing so much, they know people will chase it just to have "everything". I do lament the days I just paid for the game and got the whole experience without feeling like I'm missing out on something.

Of course the flip side to that is that most of the DLC wasn't very good anyway so you're not really missing out on anything by just sticking with the game and ignoring it. As with most things, the best way to vote is with a wallet.

Krovven wrote on Jul 21, 2013, 02:01:ItBurn's complaint and irrational justification of it is the first time I've ever seen someone suggest the title "Seasons Pass" was ambiguous enough to suggest they would get more than what was advertised.

I think its his responsibility to read the fine print but I can also understand his frustration a bit since other games have already created that expectation and multi-season pass games aren't exactly commonplace yet. As for the term itself given that it usually encompasses a period of time I think they could come up with something better, it was chosen because of familiarity more than anything else.

Redmask wrote on Jul 21, 2013, 01:43:Everyone understands what it is, it doesn't make it a good label to use for content packs with videogames as it creates expectations and consumers aren't well known for reading fine print. I don't really care either way but it's easy to see why some people get miffed about it.

I don't think so. ItBurn's complaint and irrational justification of it is the first time I've ever seen someone suggest the title "Seasons Pass" was ambiguous enough to suggest they would get more than what was advertised.

Seasons Passes have been around for at least a few years now. It's not a new concept. If people buy something without reading what they are buying, that is their failure at common sense and not the name "Seasons Pass".

Are the skins they have released new content or just a quick unlock for those that want to pay? Are the skins the ones that drop in-game or have been given away as Shift codes or created new for sale? I wouldn't know as I generally don't care about skins especially not paying extra for them. I might change my look of character once and then never again, unless the outfit provides a stat bonus of some kind. In which case I don't care what I look like, I'll take the better stat.

Redmask wrote on Jul 21, 2013, 01:43:Everyone understands what it is, it doesn't make it a good label to use for content packs with videogames as it creates expectations and consumers aren't well known for reading fine print. I don't really care either way but it's easy to see why some people get miffed about it.

As PHJF said though, I'm less concerned with the quantity than I am with the quality of the BL2 DLC which was all over the place.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the term, if you changed it to something else the problems would still persist. The real problem is that people are paying for content in advance without having any idea of what it is and what the quality will be. I'm pretty okay with preordering games but DLC content has been so iffy in general that I'm not sure why people keep doing it. I can think of a handful of companies who I trust to make good DLC and Gearbox isn't one of them. What they really needed to do was provide better DLC, the Borderlands 2 DLC I sampled wasn't very impressive. No one will be complaining about a second season of DLC if the first is all good stuff.

On a side note finally finished The Last of Us and that game just leaves a bit of a hole in you, such a great experience.

Darks wrote on Jul 21, 2013, 01:09:As usually Redmask you have nothing good to say, so do us all a favor and be quiet.

I'll get right on that when you shut your fat whiny mouth and stop crying because someone doesn't like your favorite videogame.

A "season" of content is defined by what is advertised at the start

Everyone understands what it is, it doesn't make it a good label to use for content packs with videogames as it creates expectations and consumers aren't well known for reading fine print. I don't really care either way but it's easy to see why some people get miffed about it.

As PHJF said though, I'm less concerned with the quantity than I am with the quality of the BL2 DLC which was all over the place.

A "season" of content is defined by what is advertised at the start. For TV shows it's sometimes 24 epidodes, or 23, or 16, or 12, or 10. Hell some shows seasons have been 7 or 8 episodes (see S5 of Breaking Bad).

The "season"'s worth of content for BL2 was defined when it was announced, which was 4 "episodes" of content. People even got a couple "special" episodes to go with it.

Seasons Pass is a misleading label for games, there isn't a 'season' of content and this isn't television so they should really just drop it and stick to individual DLC and other game editions. It would be great if everyone would read the seasons pass fineprint but realistically most won't. Full season or not, the Borderlands 2 DLC was overall pretty mediocre and not worth the arguments flying here anyway. Gearbox in general is a really hit and miss company, the singleplayer campaign for A:CM was one of the worst games I've ever played. I don't really care who made it, they put their stamp on it.

fujiJuice wrote on Jul 20, 2013, 23:58:It's probably a mistake to get involved in this argument, but well, here I go.

I think everyone is just reading a bit too much into itBurns comment. I believe he was just stating that the title "season pass", needs work. Like he said, he knew full well he would only be getting 4 DLC, I doubt he feels entitled to anything else. It is just that for people, who unlike him, are unaware of what "season pass" actually means, it is a bit misleading. Which I agree with, it just needs a more accurate title.

Just my two cents, I'm not here to continue the argument, just thought I could stop one.

A season, is just that. It refers to them telling us that with in one season. One year! they will release the promised DLC. ItBurn is over reacting and making a big deal out of this when all he has to do is use his god given common sense to figure it out and stop acting like a fool.

It's probably a mistake to get involved in this argument, but well, here I go.

I think everyone is just reading a bit too much into itBurns comment. I believe he was just stating that the title "season pass", needs work. Like he said, he knew full well he would only be getting 4 DLC, I doubt he feels entitled to anything else. It is just that for people, who unlike him, are unaware of what "season pass" actually means, it is a bit misleading. Which I agree with, it just needs a more accurate title.

Just my two cents, I'm not here to continue the argument, just thought I could stop one.